William Lane Craig on The argument from religious experience

Craig's treatment of religious experience is distinctive and controversial: he claims that the inner witness of the Holy Spirit provides a self-authenticating knowledge of God that does not depend on — and indeed trumps — philosophical arguments. This is not merely a feeling or impression but a genuine form of knowledge, comparable to perceptual knowledge.

This position has drawn criticism from both atheists and fellow theologians. Critics argue that it makes Craig's theism unfalsifiable: if the Holy Spirit's witness trumps all evidence, then no argument could ever change his mind. Craig responds that this is true of all properly basic beliefs — we cannot argue someone out of the belief that the external world exists, either, and we should not try.

Craig sees religious experience as part of his cumulative case: the arguments provide public, sharable reasons to believe, while the Holy Spirit provides private, direct knowledge. Someone who has experienced the witness of the Holy Spirit does not need arguments to know God exists, though the arguments serve an important role in removing intellectual obstacles for others.